Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 03, 2015, 05:32:25 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 644
26  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DEMOCRATS: If Webb wins nomination, would you vote for him in general? on: June 27, 2015, 08:02:13 pm
Yes he's so racist against East Asians that his wife is Vietnamese.

LOL. What a wonderful world you live in.
27  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DEMOCRATS: If Webb wins nomination, would you vote for him in general? on: June 27, 2015, 03:58:15 pm
So you would vote for someone who voted to invade Iraq?

But not for someone who wants to keep the Confederate flag over cemeteries?

The Confederate flag is a greater injustice than the Iraq War?

I would vote for Clinton but not Webb, either. Webb seems scarily hawkish when it comes to the Far East, and a war there would be x1,000 worse than Iraq.

Obama, Clinton, and Webb all essentially have the same stance on the Far East.

No, they don't. Webb has been a lot more aggressive on confronting China. Neither of the other two have compared the PRC to 1930s Japan. Webb seems to have a fetish against China. Given his pro-war stance on Vietnam, I wouldn't be surprised if he was a racist. Of the three, I think Clinton would be most reasonable, actually.

Also there's the fact that Webb endorsed Bush in 2000, and if Bush had not won I doubt Gore would have invaded Iraq.
28  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Worse Supreme Court Justice on: June 26, 2015, 11:03:43 pm
Ehh, it depends on the way in which "dignity" is used. When I think of dignity it is moral dignity, meaning an inner bearing, that the person has the right to pride. In this sense, I don't think injustices done to people by others can rob this. To argue otherwise would be dehumanizing.

That being said the application Thomas uses is certainly incorrect. It's akin to saying "It's okay to rob someone because if you did, it wouldn't be their fault."
29  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Breaking: Supreme Court rules SSM a legal right on: June 26, 2015, 09:35:13 pm
Great post, Clarko. Progress always comes too late.
30  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Your opinion on Abortion on: June 26, 2015, 08:45:52 pm
It is amusing how often anti-abortion and anti-women are used synonymously by many liberals; this is a big reason why many pro-life women resist feminism.
Wait, are you saying you think pro-life actually does mean anti-woman?

I don't think he was saying that, but I'm not going to speak for him, so he should answer your question.

What I believe he was hinting at is something I've argued about with other feminists a lot, as of late. While I am a feminist and pro-choice, within the feminist movement the dominant view on abortion is being pro-choice, and anyone who isn't is derided as "self-hating" and "misogynist" and spitting out the "misogynist white old men controlling women's bodies!!!".

Well if you are pro-choice and a feminist, people who are anti-choice are, from your perspective, trying to take away a pretty fundamental woman's right for reasons you regard are illegitimate. Even if that person's motivations are not misogynist, the effect is the same. It's just like people who oppose SSM but claim to love gays- if you really loved them, you'd give them their legitimate rights. Combine that with, the fact that there really are a lot of misogynist white old men who want to control women's bodies, and that sexism and a need to control women's reproductive function underlies the religious base of the U.S. pro-life movement, and you have a pretty legitimate case that feminists should be worried about it.

Quote
Since about half of women oppose abortion partially or fully, and many other feminists are militantly pro-choice, a lot of pro-life women say they're "pro-gender equality but not a feminist", which is kind of hilarious and sad at the same time because it's the same thing, but since many of them sincerely believe that abortion = murder of a unborn fetus, they associate the modern feminist movement with an unapologetic "pro-murder" stance.


Again, no one is saying that there aren't pro-life women out there who believe that abortion is murder and that the movement feminist movement is about murder. No one has ever said that. Also, I believe that no woman, not even women who think women are dumber, weaker, morally inferior to men and don't deserve the right to vote, want to be treated as an object, disrespected, denied opportunities, raped, told their place by a man, or live lives as appendages of their husbands just for being a woman. If any woman really didn't mind those things, they wouldn't mind those things were they a man, either. So in a sense, Germaine Greer is right when she says that every woman is a feminist, whether she calls herself one or not. Still, simply being a woman does not mean that every one of your opinions is automatically a feminist opinion.

Quote
I also see a lot of women (who don't even have to be conservative or pro-life) shy away from the feminist label because of other things, like opposing the "Free the Nipple" campaign because of differing views about sexuality and its role in society, the whole "sex positive" campaign (again, because of differing ideas about sexuality), views on dating and promiscuous sex, other moral issues, and the belief that the modern feminist movement often ventures into hating men, like those profoundly stupid op-eds with titles like "Are Men Obsolete?". I've met quite a few women who argue for things like equal pay, anti-discrimination legislation, and don't tolerate misogynistic and sexually inappropriate comments towards them while still not identifying as a feminist.

And why is that a problem? Not everyone has to, or should identify as a feminist. If a majority of people started identifying as feminist and society continued to look as it does today for any length of time, then there would be something wrong with feminism. Supporting actual equality is far more important than what label you attach to yourself. In fact, the only reason I call myself a feminist is for reasons of convenience. Anyone who could peer into my brain would see a feminist, so it would be dishonest to disavow a term with good communicative value. But I would prefer to use a different term because the word 'feminism' conjures up a socio-political movement heavily Western-centric, Anglo-centric and white-centric. I would prefer just to call it women's rights/equality. And of course, there will be a diversity of views within what is called 'feminism'. My views are only my own, and I speak for no one else. Another problem with the term 'feminism' is that it conjures up some sort of monolithic movement of millions of people marching in lockstep, when that couldn't be farther from the truth. No matter who you are, there will always be people in the movement who disagree with you on some matter or another.


Quote
I'm going to admit that as a feminist myself, I don't like a lot of other people who are feminists because they actually hurt the cause. I must concede that one valid criticism of feminism is that there is sometimes a "groupthink" and attacking anyone who doesn't agree 110% with them. I think we feminists could do a much better job educating people and winning new supporters by recognizing that things aren't as black and white as we'd like them to be, and not everyone who disagrees with smaller points should be vilified as "misogynistic, old, white Republican men", because that's incredibly self-defeating and hurts the cause. Issues like gay marriage and reforming the criminal justice system are pretty cut and dry; the abortion debate is not.

Well, I see sexism as pretty black and white, and abortion as pretty black and white, but many feminists take the view of 'I think it should be legal but I would never do it myself/it's a necessary evil'. There are a lot of feminists who see abortion as a gray issue. But there are a lot who see it as black and white as well, and they're entitled to argue with people who disagree with them. If you're looking for a pure, perfectly reasonable mass entity under the umbrella of this silly term 'feminism', you're never going to find it.
31  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DEMOCRATS: If Webb wins nomination, would you vote for him in general? on: June 26, 2015, 07:38:30 pm
So you would vote for someone who voted to invade Iraq?

But not for someone who wants to keep the Confederate flag over cemeteries?

The Confederate flag is a greater injustice than the Iraq War?

I would vote for Clinton but not Webb, either. Webb seems scarily hawkish when it comes to the Far East, and a war there would be x1,000 worse than Iraq.
32  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Gay Marraige will be legal in 50 years on: June 26, 2015, 05:22:24 pm
Are we there yet?
33  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: What will be the next big social issue? on: June 26, 2015, 05:20:46 pm
I have changed my view of polygamy to supportive. I think it's hard to argue against the idea of polygamy, and the biggest real problems with it are purely practical. But practical difficulties in living something out don't justify a blanket ban. Prostitution should definitely be decriminalized, if not legalized.

Transgender rights, prison reform and drug legalization are may be the next big issues that occupy us for a time before passing through a stage of acceptance. Issues of race, gender, immigration (an appendage to race, sort of), and so on will always be with us.

At least it's consistent. Many SSM supporters get awfully angry when this topic is mentioned.

Do you understand Beet's (fortunately fringe) position as necessary in order to be consistent? Because the increasingly prevalent opinion that I've encountered (and which I hold) is that limitation to two partners is qualitatively more important to the institution of marriage in our society, in societies similar to or derived from ours, and in the expected and hoped-for future of our society than is the question of the partners' sexes, and thus it's not inconsistent to put stock in the former but not in the latter.

Which I acknowledged 11 years ago, when I already took the 'consistent' pro-SSM position that you praise here, a very narrowly tailored pro-SSM position that avoided any slippery slopes. And that remains a perfectly consistent position, yes.

But over time, the predominant pro-SSM position evolved to a simpler one, by Occam's razor superior, which was "If it harms no one, then why not?" Basically, if society thinks the harms of denying something (in this case, recognition of SSM) is greater than the harms of allowing it (apparently nothing more than the mental anguish of anti-SSM conservatives) then it will be supported.

All the polygamists need to do is point to one healthy, loving and working polygamist family who isn't hurt anyone, but is being hurt by lack of legal recognition, and ask "why not?" to build a very strong case for themselves.
34  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: What will be the next big social issue? on: June 26, 2015, 04:41:54 pm
I have changed my view of polygamy to supportive. I think it's hard to argue against the idea of polygamy, and the biggest real problems with it are purely practical. But practical difficulties in living something out don't justify a blanket ban. Prostitution should definitely be decriminalized, if not legalized.

Transgender rights, prison reform and drug legalization are may be the next big issues that occupy us for a time before passing through a stage of acceptance. Animal rights may gain more prominence. Abortion doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Issues of race, gender, immigration (an appendage to race, sort of), and so on will always be with us.
35  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Your opinion on Abortion on: June 26, 2015, 04:35:32 pm
Also, even if one believes that the opposition to abortion has nothing to do with sexism (some of it is, even if not all of it is), it's undeniable that restriction of the right to abortion has a disparate impact on women. After all, cis men can't get pregnant! Hence it makes perfect sense why this is a critical issue for feminists and why they frame it as a women's issue.
36  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which of the Republicans Would Make the Overall Best President? on: June 26, 2015, 04:11:12 pm
Rand Paul, if he sticks to his views.
37  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Your opinion on Abortion on: June 26, 2015, 03:52:22 pm
The pro choice camp hasn't been "losing so badly" in the past few years:





I would say trends are marginally in the right direction. It's true the Republicans have taken over a lot of legislatures and passed a lot of restrictive legislation, but that doesn't appear to be the result of a shift in public opinion.

Just because men and women are equally likely to identify as pro-choice, that doesn't mean they do so for the same reasons. Women tend to be more communitarian and men tend to be more libertarian, so you would expect an issue like abortion rights to be more popular with men on that basis. On the other hand, abortion rights are a right enjoyed by women, hence it is equally popular with them on that basis.

The idea that there aren't a lot of misogynist men out there who oppose abortion rights based religious objections is complete hogwash. Is every person who opposes abortion rights a misogynist? Of course not. But is a big part of the opposition to abortion religious-driven, and do these religions hold to sexist doctrines? Of course. If pro-life was secular, you would see pro-life movements in countries without a strong religious right, like Japan or France, but you don't.
38  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: CNN: NH: Hillary and Sanders in a tight race on: June 26, 2015, 10:53:12 am
Of course, women are human beings with multiple 'identities', and they're not going to support Hillary in the face of overwhelming pressure not to do so. Given the hurricane of negative media coverage Hillary has gotten as well as the overwhelmingly pro-Sanders social media environment (yes, yes, I know, Ron Paul yada yada, but one day little Johnny will grow up, and the Internet really is growing up) I think Democratic women's (and men's) support levels of Hillary are astounding. It's worth noting that the full extent of black support for Obama didn't emerge until after he won the Iowa caucus. But in this poll even, Bernie has a 10-point lead among men and Hillary has a 21-point lead among women. That's pretty big.

So far, polling seems to show that more disaffected voters prefer Hillary. Places where people are highly engaged in politics (such as Daily Kos) are heavily pro-Bernie, and people like these are the core of his support. The reality is, both Sanders and Hillary are pragmatic Democrats and both are more economically leftist than Obama, but neither one would be much different than Obama in the face of the present Congress.

When Obama beat Hillary in '08, you could have argued that it was because he was such an amazing candidate that he beat another heavily favored candidate. But if Sanders beats her in '16, the narrative will be about how Hillary was never as strong a candidate as she was made out to be. One upset, and it's about the upsetter. Two upsets of the same person, and it's about the upsettee. In that case, the reason for a second Hillary defeat would not be that Bernie was such a great candidate, but the refusal to see a woman who could lead a feminist campaign as a revolutionary event that would upset the status quo.
39  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: CNN: NH: Hillary and Sanders in a tight race on: June 26, 2015, 10:05:13 am
It's true that many otherwise Democratic sympathizers dislike Hillary so much that they'd throw away the General Election just to stop her. Which there is nothing wrong with, as we're all entitled to our dispositions, myself included. But let's call a spade a spade.

Purity progressives won't accept Hillary purportedly because, although she voted with Bernie on 93% of all issues, and has gotten to his left on issues like immigration and gun control, she doesn't follow some unattainable dream of turning America into Scandinavia over the course of one campaign. The feminist implications of of a Democratic woman who has been known for championing women's rights for at least 20 years, and the actually attainable dream of a campaign around that, is not important to them.

Why should one be privileged over the other on the scale of progressivism? This is an impossible argument to make on a forum almost exclusively made up of white men. But the political spectrum that Bernie is a part of was created by white men, and has been manned by white men from the far right to the far left, since the French Revolution. It's more radical to transform our conception of what the political spectrum means to include a more whole set of concerns than to simply move along it. Gender justice must be a core component of the political spectrum, and on that score Hillary is to Bernie's left. The reasons why, besides just her gender, should be quite obvious.
40  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Breaking: Supreme Court rules SSM a legal right on: June 26, 2015, 09:29:06 am
41  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: CNN: NH: Hillary and Sanders in a tight race on: June 25, 2015, 05:28:33 pm
Go Hillary!
42  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Kirkegaard's "Knight of Infinite Resignation"? on: June 25, 2015, 01:54:42 pm
IIRC, the Knight of Infinite Resignation is Abraham going, 'Yes, God has commanded me to murder my son, but I will do it because I am infinitely resigned to giving up all that I love', whereas the Knight of Faith is Abraham going, 'Yes, God has commanded me to murder my son, but I will do it because somehow, I am positive that he will make it alright even though I have no idea how.'
43  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Fox: Clinton tops all except Bush on: June 25, 2015, 12:48:42 pm
Bush seems to be underrated, he's a respectable moderate from Florida and most people will go for that over rejecting him simply because of his brother.
44  General Discussion / Constitution and Law / Re: Are you happy about the Supreme Courts decision on King v. Burwell on: June 25, 2015, 12:46:22 pm
Yep. I'm a proud supporter of ObamaCare, and while I would make some changes to the law if I could, I have no qualms with the subsidies or the individual/employer mandates.
45  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: John Oliver condemns online harassment, the Internet responds predictably on: June 25, 2015, 12:33:36 pm
Yes, I have to admit, I have no idea about whether what Sarkeesian says about video games is right or not, and the main reason I've supported her financially is the unhinged reaction she gets is disproportionate to anything anyone should ever get for saying anything about video games, which leads me to think it's not about video games at all. Just as GamerGate is not about video games.

The same thing could be said about so much of why the Internet has turned me into a radical feminist of sorts; a feminist says something very mild, be it an unwanted advance in an elevator, or guns aren't the solution to rape, and an explosion of misogyny follows. Technology has revealed some deep seeded misogyny amongst a large segment of the population. Women like Monica Lewinsky, Kathy Sierra, are my heroes.
46  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Once more, gun control opponents... on: June 21, 2015, 11:08:50 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL8JEEt2RxI&app=desktop
47  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Narendra Modi on: June 17, 2015, 06:44:53 pm
HP, but better than any of the dictatorial thugs from China. Modi at least settles territorial disputes. Xi creates them.
48  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Opinion of Alexis Tsipras on: June 17, 2015, 06:35:32 pm
There's no happy ending to this story is there? Depressing.

Greece is near bottom and will soon start to recover, no matter how badly they screw up. If they're ejected from the euro, they will suddenly hit bottom and have nowhere to go but up. If they capitulate, they will resume the upward trend they were on before Tsipiras.
49  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Racism! It's not just something which happens in America... on: June 17, 2015, 06:24:16 pm
Isn't this country dependent on tourism? Boycott/divest from the Domincan Republic.
50  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Do you ever have weird personal feelings of irrendentism? on: June 17, 2015, 05:21:52 pm
No, I'd rather see national borders become meaningless than obsess about their minor details.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 644


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines